About your Search

20121222
20121230
STATION
CSPAN 5
LINKTV 2
CNNW 1
CSPAN2 1
WHUT (Howard University Television) 1
LANGUAGE
English 12
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
teal the pentagon is bracing for $500 billion but that is over the next decade and raises questions how military leaders plan to keep the nation safe. >> last friday when president obama rolled out his new plan for steering us away from the fiscal cliff there was word he did not say, that word was, sequester, the sequester would automatically cut more than a hundred billion from the budget next year, half from domestic programs and half from defense programs. as the deadline draws close, experts are looking at national security standpoint and warning one final time about the impact on the safety of our service members. >> it's going to affect the operational force that is deployed in terms of its ability to maintain equipment, to get repair parts. that force is delayed around the world, not just the force in afghanistan that is being reduced. it would impact on the training of the force and preparedness. >> reporter: white house officials say it's unclear what is going to happen. on friday john mccain said he doesn't see how a deal gets done without addressing the cuts. >> a lot of defe
security posture. interagency teams give particular scrutiny to high threat posed. the pentagon agreed to dispatch additional marines to post around the world. we asked congress for funds to hire new diplomatic security personnel. we're updating our diplomat procedures to increase the number of experienced and well- trained staffs serving at those posts. tom and i will be discussing all this work and more with congress tomorrow. for now, let me make one other point. i have been a proud member of the foreign service for more than 30 years. i've had the honor of serving as a chief of mission overseas. i know that diplomacy by its very nature must sometimes be practiced in dangerous places. chris stevens understood that our diplomats may not work in bunkers and do their jobs. it is important to recognize that our colleagues in the bureau's of diplomatic security at home and abroad did it right countless times a day for years on end. but we have learned some very hard and painful lessons benghazi. we're already acting on them. we have to do more to constantly improve, reduce the risks that
the wall street journal, or the pentagon indicated they wanted to maintain 6000 to 15th thousand u.s. troops following 2014. that is the issue under discussion now. there's approximately around 340 0,000 afghan security forces in place, including the police. the pentagon recently indicated i don't believe there was a major unit capable of operating independently from nato support. there was some manipulation of the metrics they were using where the things appear to be making more progress than perhaps they were. that came out in a white paper. what will be the long term success or failure of the afghan national security forces is yet to be determined. they need about $4.1 billion a year to continue at that level, which is more than the entire government revenues in afghanistan. so it's gone to take a long-term commitment of foreign powers to maintain that size of armed forces. the afghans have proven that they are excellent fighters. the question is will they be excellent soldiers for the government of afghanistan? host: one other question, how stable do you think the karzai govern
another 1600 spies of the pentagon can have their own spy agency to compete with, what, the cia abroad? when you see the interventions that have fallen flat and have been disastrous such as libya and benghazi, when you see a cut a growing in strength because of our own -- al qaeda growing in strength because of our own misapplication of force, you have to ask, if this is about democrat and republican, the system is failing. we are seeing evidence of a fiscally and also in foreign policy and evidence of it domestically when you can see a surveillance state arising under the noses of both political parties and. >> you talk about your alliance with ron paul. both of you are leaving. this is your last days in congress, at least this time. so who are your successors, who you see in congress right now who will carry on these struggles for privacy, against drones? >> i would hope people i have worked with in the past like barbara lee, alan grayson and others would continue the efforts. there are people on both sides of the aisle which expressed concern. you have to remember we put together a
the pentagon. what did she tell you? >> reporter: well, this really is a heart breaking case. you know, i just have to put it in perspective, a military installation, a child care facility, a stone's throw from where i am standing at the pentagon, it would take me just a few minutes to walk across the road to this child care operation. a mother who has now learned that her young toddler was one of the victims of this alleged child abuse decided to speak out about it. she wanted her face shielded, she wants her children's privacy protected. she still worries about retaliation against her husband, by the military, but she tells us a chilling tale. >> all along this first week when we were being sort of given piecemeal information, denied access to the videotapes, we were also being asked if we wanted to seek medical care for our child. so -- >> medical care for what? >> for what, obviously. we wanted to understand and see with our own eyes since that evidence was available. >> barbara, it took a long time for the information to come out. why? and what steps is the department taking, the defense
. by contrast, the international affairs budget is less than one-tenth of the pentagon's. secretary gates has spoken about this and strongly urged the congress to address that imbalance. we have not yet. admiral mullen pointed out, the more diplomacy is cut, the more lives are lost. we have to make certain that we are not penny-wise and pound-foolish when it comes to supporting americas vital overseas interests. adequately funding foreign-policy initiatives is not spending, but investing in our long-term security, and more often or not, it saves far more expensive expenditures in dollars and lives in the conflicts that we fail to see or avoid. we need to invest in america's long-term interest in order to do the job of diplomacy in a dangerous world. this report makes that crystal clear. since 1985, i have had the privilege of making official journeys to one trouble spot or another. i have met a lot of our men and women in the foreign services. we sat and talked about the work they do and the lives that they lead. they spent years learning the languages of the country so they can be on the fro
the impact on the military overall will be, quote, very serious. >> the pentagon and the departments are already in financial trouble, because there has already been a $480 billion cut that is being applied right now as we speak. to take another cut on top of that is devastating. >> reporter: it's not just the military itself that will take a hit, also the defense industry, defense contractors, private companies that do work for the pentagon. one democratic congressman in northern virginia whose district maybe hit the hardest by all of this says it could mean layoffs. >> the large defense contractors will probably be okay, they have significant cash reserves, most of them. the smaller contractors would have trouble getting their lines of credit extended, trouble keeping their employees, if they can't be assured of continued employment. >> reporter: congressman moran says if we go over the cliff, which he thinks we will, then the impact and severity of the automatic defense spending cuts depend how long they are in place into the new year before congress finally fixes this fiscal clif
partnering with the pentagon to send 35 additional detachments of the marine security guards that's about 235 marines to the medium and high for outposts where they will serve as a visible deterrent to a hostile act. that is on top of the 150 detachments we already deployed. we are aligning resources in the 2013 budget request to address the physical form a devotees and reinforce the structures wherever needed to address the risk from fire. let me add we may need your help to ensure that we have the authority to streamline the usual process that produced faster results. we are seeking to hire more than 150 diplomatic security personnel and increased 5% to provide them with the equipment and training that they need. there is the arb recommended we will target them squarely at securing our - outposts. i want to second the praise for the professionals. i served in this department for only two years having come from the private sector. however, as i travel to places like iraq, afghanistan and pakistan i have seen firsthand how the dedicated men and women risk their lives. we all hold them with a
of the attack? this raises questions that the pentagon and the defense department must consider. what greater world the we need the military to play a defense of personnel overseas, especially in the broader middle east that has been never more unsettled? what is the right military posture for forces in the region? what do we need them to do? conversations about the military and defense right now, are mostly about budgets and numbers. it is important to talk more about objectives, strategy, and policies since the attack in benghazi could represent a kind of new normal in our dangerous world. the defense department needs to answer these questions. i might add in the authorization bill we added authorization for 1000 additional marines to be used to protect our installations, diplomatic installations overseas. it is essential for the community to conduct a similar arb-type effort. why did it take more than a week for the eye witnesses' accounts to reach our analysts put these witnesses could have told them in minutes there was no protest at our consulate, a conclusion that in the absence of thi
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)